Unrealistic things in movies and tv shows that drive you crazy

[Anonymous]

Faith on Buffy was bi.

[Anonymous]

Apparently everyone in nyc leaves their apartment door unlocked.

Friends
Seinfeld
Felicity
Etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Genuinely curious what show/movie you are thinking of when you say this. I can't think of any examples.

Monroe on Too Close for Comfort way back in the 80s.

Nobody even addressed his sexuality directly. And he was the real star of the show.

I think that was more because it wasn't proper to have an out gay character. Homosexuality was depicted as something you didn't talk about. The characters could behave like stereotypical "gay" people, but baby boomer moms could believe they were just charming bachelors. Charles Nelson Riley, Paul Lynde, etc.

Disagree.

Three’s Company joked about it.

Wilson Cruz and Scott Thompson played countless gay characters seamlessly.

[Anonymous]

Perfect hair all the time.
This is a weird one but when a character has many different coats. Maybe some people do but most regular people I know always wear one, max two winter coats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any time a girl throws up, she's pregnant. 100% of the time.

Anytime a character has a nose bleed, they have a brain tumor.

[Anonymous]

Monica on Friends is supposed to be a clean freak, yet the characters put their dirty shoes on her couch and other furniture. I remember Phoebe doing this in one episode. Totally unrealistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Drives me insane when characters don’t wear hats when in bitterly cold environments. Can’t tell you how many times I was yelling at the screen watching Game of Thrones!

When Asian families don’t take their shoes off. I had to stop watching Beauty and the Beast (2012 TV show) because the Asian main character didn’t take her shoes off when she walked into the house.

This is annoying but also kinda funny. When shows have obviously not ever visited the DC area.
—the characters say “the 95”. In Ca they say ‘the 101’ when referencing highways. Here we just say ‘95’
—Bones, they always were driving towards the Capitol. Didn’t matter where they were going, the establishing shot was them driving toward the Capitol
—NCIS, always solving cases in Norfolk. Driving down in the morning, work on case and home by evening 🙄
—NCIS, chased suspect from Braddock Mall (off Braddock Rd in Ffx County) right into an Orange Grove
— Criminal Minds, Spencer gets of the Quantico metro station
— Criminal Minds, one of the female characters is in her condo that overlooks Memorial Bridge and Lincoln Memorial. (I was unaware that Arlington Cemetery has condos 🙄)

Criminal Minds was the worst with creative geography. Murder in Idaho? Let's talk about it around the table in Quantico, be ready for "wheels up" on the private jet in 30 (good thing a private jet is available to every crime-fighting Fed), investigate, present the profile to the local LEOs, catch the bad guy, fall asleep on the private plane back to Quantico (all except the two people discussing some character's arc story), meet up back the office and talk about where to go to dinner in downtown DC.

[Anonymous]

A diagnosis on House always includes Lupus.

Doctors do all the procedures on House and NOT THE NURSES.

They all drank on Dallas and NOBODY ever had to pee. Ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They seemingly never repeat outfits. Ever.

Roseanne was perhaps the first and only show where people wore outfits more than once.

And yet all the flannels on Roseanne are from ll bean. (Most of Becky’s clothing in the new series is from nordstrom—yes, nordstrom sells bedazzled rose embroidered jeans) So unrealistic!

The most realistic clothing were the suits on the office, so ill fitting, it captured the average American office worker style so well

LL Bean flannels last forever so it makes sense to have a handful for life.

but the family on roseanne is trapped in a cycle of generational poverty, they can't afford to pay their mortgages, they certainly aren't investing in "quality" clothing

Here's an unrealistic aspect of the conners--I am confused by the high school son's "trying to get a scholarship so he can go to college" plotline. Presumably the family is very poor, so wouldn't they qualify for the Illinois Commitment at a place like UIUC where he'd gt free tuition and fees for four years because his family earns less than 67k a year? https://osfa.illinois.edu/illinois-commitment/

Those Halloween episodes— gnarly as they were — were also unrealistic from a money standpoint.

I disagree! They chose what to spend their money on, like real life people. It was their thing. My best friend from middle school (still friends today) grew up in a household a lot like the Connors, and they always did Halloween BIG. Plus, you can add to your Halloween decor and costume collection little by little over the years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perfect hair all the time.
This is a weird one but when a character has many different coats. Maybe some people do but most regular people I know always wear one, max two winter coats.

I thought the same thing about coats when I was watching Murphy Brown this morning. She wore 3 different coats in 1 30-minute episode.

[Anonymous]

People who kiss right when they wake up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Genuinely curious what show/movie you are thinking of when you say this. I can't think of any examples.

Monroe on Too Close for Comfort way back in the 80s.

Nobody even addressed his sexuality directly. And he was the real star of the show.

I think that was more because it wasn't proper to have an out gay character. Homosexuality was depicted as something you didn't talk about. The characters could behave like stereotypical "gay" people, but baby boomer moms could believe they were just charming bachelors. Charles Nelson Riley, Paul Lynde, etc.

Disagree.

Three’s Company joked about it.

Wilson Cruz and Scott Thompson played countless gay characters seamlessly.

Three's Company joked about it in what way? I don't remember.

[Anonymous]

The crazy geography of all shows- like it shows someone going from say Georgetown University to upper northwest and they pass the Jefferson Memorial, Washington Monument, Pentagon, etc. I also recently watched a foreign film that had characters living on the coast in LA (presumably Malibu) and they ran out of their yard being chased by the bad guys and ended up on the Hollywood walk of fame, then in the area underneath the sign!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Genuinely curious what show/movie you are thinking of when you say this. I can't think of any examples.

Monroe on Too Close for Comfort way back in the 80s.

Nobody even addressed his sexuality directly. And he was the real star of the show.

I think that was more because it wasn't proper to have an out gay character. Homosexuality was depicted as something you didn't talk about. The characters could behave like stereotypical "gay" people, but baby boomer moms could believe they were just charming bachelors. Charles Nelson Riley, Paul Lynde, etc.

The entire premise was Jack was gay and that’s why it was acceptable for him to live with two women.
Disagree.

Three’s Company joked about it.

Wilson Cruz and Scott Thompson played countless gay characters seamlessly.

Three's Company joked about it in what way? I don't remember.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Genuinely curious what show/movie you are thinking of when you say this. I can't think of any examples.

Monroe on Too Close for Comfort way back in the 80s.

Nobody even addressed his sexuality directly. And he was the real star of the show.

I think that was more because it wasn't proper to have an out gay character. Homosexuality was depicted as something you didn't talk about. The characters could behave like stereotypical "gay" people, but baby boomer moms could believe they were just charming bachelors. Charles Nelson Riley, Paul Lynde, etc.

Disagree.

Three’s Company joked about it.

Wilson Cruz and Scott Thompson played countless gay characters seamlessly.

The joke for the viewer was that Jack was pretending to be gay, but clearly wasn't.

Not exactly an openly gay character.